Justice Committee on March 30th, 2010

[Insp John Ferguson]

Absolutely; the revealing of certain techniques is always an issue. The problem we have with disclosure is the threshold: we don't know what it is. If you ask us what relevant disclosure is, I'd be hard-pressed to give you an answer. I'm speaking figuratively, not literally, of course, but there are a lot of times when it's almost opinion-based: the defence will say this is something that should be disclosed; the crown will say no; the judge will decide. That's for that case. In the next case, with the same set of circumstances, there's a different decision.

The threshold has to be determined. We have to know what the expectations are with respect to disclosure.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Do you find the same thing, Chief Weighill?

[Chief Clive Weighill]

Absolutely. Disclosure is bogging down the system. When you get a major investigation, you probably spend as long getting your disclosure ready for court as you did on the investigation.

I don't know how we're going to get away from that. I think disclosure is fair, but it really is onerous.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

It's also providing information to the criminal gangs on how to go around the system; that's one of the points.

[Chief Clive Weighill]

Absolutely, yes; it's like watching TV shows. That's where a lot of crooks learn their stuff—and through disclosure.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

Before we go on to Mr. Woodworth, I want to ask Ms. Fussey something the analysts have asked about. In your initial presentation you talked about two marine ports in British Columbia that you're concerned about. Is that correct?

[Kimberly Fussey]

No, one would be in northern Manitoba--

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Two marine locations, then.

[Kimberly Fussey]

--yes--and the second would be in the Northwest Territories, I believe.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

The one in Manitoba would be Churchill, is that right?

[Kimberly Fussey]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

And the one in the Northwest Territories...?

[Kimberly Fussey]

I believe it's Inuvik.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

All right. Thank you.

Mr. Woodworth, you have five minutes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

There are two things I'd like to inquire about. The one I'll leave for the end is for Inspector Bazin, who talked about legislative restrictions on sharing intelligence.

But before I get to that, I'd like to ask Chief Weighill about the amendments to the Young Offenders Act. There are two you've already expressed support for, one of them making protection of society a primary goal of the legislation and the other requiring the court to consider publishing the names of violent young offenders when necessary for the protection of society.

There's a lot of misinformation out there around these amendments, but there are only three other things that the amendments to the legislation would do, and I'd like to get your view on these. One is to simplify the rules to keep violent and repeat offenders off the streets while awaiting trial, when necessary to protect society.

Do you have any comment on that? Does it sound like a reasonable thing?

[Chief Clive Weighill]

I completely agree with it.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

All right. Thank you.

Another is to require the crown to consider seeking an adult sentence for youth convicted of the most serious crimes: murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, and aggravated assault. The crown would also be required to simply inform the court, if it chose not to apply for an adult sentence.

So it's limited to the most serious crimes, does not require an adult sentence, and just requires the crown to consider whether it might be a good idea. Would that, in your view, be reasonable?

[Chief Clive Weighill]

Yes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Then, the last thing these amendments would do is enable the courts to impose more appropriate sentences on other violent and repeat offenders as necessary in individual cases, to use existing sanctions in a way that would discourage an individual from offending again, to use a pattern of escalating criminal activity to seek a custodial sentence when necessary, and to impose a custodial sentence for reckless behaviour that puts the lives and safety of others at risk.

Do you have any comment on that one?

[Chief Clive Weighill]

That one's a little more complex. I agree with some of it; some of it I don't. Any time you make something punitive hoping that nobody will do it again, I don't think you're a winner. But I do think you have to make some interventions with serious repeat offenders.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

Inspector Bazin, you mentioned legislative restrictions on sharing intelligence. Are you referring to PIPEDA, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act?

[Insp Robert Bazin]

That's part of it. There are some restrictions under the Privacy Act as well.

There are also restrictions under various acts. The Customs Act, for example, is one of them. When you're dealing with international agencies, or in our case with those in the U.S., there are certain restrictions about what we can and can't share. Overall, in this country, there's still a bit of a chill on our ability to share, especially when we're talking with the Americans.

We need to carefully look at what those restrictions are, and to the extent that we can, lift some that I don't believe are necessary in most cases.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Are there any existing exemptions that allow the sharing of information and that might serve as a model across the board?

[Insp Robert Bazin]

Not that I know of.